The Hypocrisy of Barney Frank

By Andrew M. Greenwell, Esq.
8/21/2012
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

Barney Frank's entire lifestyle is against the common good.

Barney Frank suggests that Paul Ryan--and other unidentified "right wingers" who are supposed followers of Ayn Rand--are wed to a philosophy of individualism and are accordingly acting against the common good. That's the rub. That's the hypocritical pretense. Barney Frank's entire lifestyle is against the common good.

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX (Catholic Online) - A few days ago, the inimitable Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the retiring Democratic congressman who recently married his longtime male partner James Ready in a homosexual "marriage," appeared on Al Sharpton's MSNBC show. Referring in particular to the Republican Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan's alleged "tie" to the objectivist philosophy of philosopher Ayn Rand, Frank gave this audacious opinion: "These are right wingers who have this philosophy, going back to Ayn Rand, that says we should not come together to do things for the common good."

Now, I'm not here to discuss what may or may not be Paul Ryan's troublesome ties to Ayn Rand, a brief treatment of which you may find here, or his devotion to the common good. What I am here to expose is the rank hypocrisy of Barney Frank which exists regardless of Paul Ryan's particular views.

Hypocrisy is the practice of claiming to have moral standards or moral beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. This position is exactly where Barney Frank finds himself.

Barney Frank suggests that Paul Ryan--and other unidentified "right wingers" who are allegedly "followers" of Ayn Rand--are wed to a philosophy of individualism and are accordingly acting against the common good.

That's the rub.

That's the hypocritical pretense.

Barney Frank rails against the "right wing" followers of Ayn Rand for acting against the common good as if Barney Frank has adopted a philosophy of life that is not individualistic and instead furthers the common good.

Here is Barney Frank--a man who espouses same-sex "marriage," has advocated its adoption in the Democratic platform, would force this institution on all of us by the force of law willy-nilly, and is the first Congressman ever to be "wed" in such a same-sex "marriage."--talking about his devotion to the common good?

Really?

Frank's devotion to the common good is really a farce, a pretense, a lie. The common good is never advanced by laws promoting or legitimizing same-sex marriage. The common good is never advanced by homosexual genital activity. His life, and the vice he engages with relish and would like to institutionalize as sacred, is a symbol of a person acting against the common good.

As the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stated in its document Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons issued in 2003, "Laws in favor of homosexual unions are contrary to right reason because they confer legal guarantees, analogous to those granted to marriage, to unions of persons of the same sex."

That means that homosexual unions are unreasonable and arbitrary, and--regardless of religious belief or even the lack of belief--against the universally-binding natural moral law. It is not a matter of choice; it is a matter of reality, of what is. Granting any legitimacy to such unions is ipso facto against the common good because such unions are against the good of any human civil society.

The reason why equating marriage with "homosexual unions" (however the latter are denominated, i.e., civil unions, gay "marriage," same-sex "marriage") is against the common good is that such laws represent a failure of the State's duty "to promote and defend marriage"--a stable and permanent union between a man and a woman--"as an institution essential to the common good."

Homosexuality is an unfortunate disordered tendency, but is not itself a sin or against the common good. And I do not rail against Barney Frank for his tendencies which evidently plague him and which he may or may not be in control of. A homosexual person may very well have the common good in mind and at heart and may live honorable and productive, even a holy life.

Yet homosexual genital activity of any kind is itself intrinsically wrong and against the common good (just like prostitution, pre-marital sex, adultery, or incest all of which are genital activities against the common good). And the problem of granting any legitimacy to such homosexual unions institutionalizes or socializes such sexual activity, attempting forcefully--and against all reality--to define it as part of the common good.

To raise such unions and the genital activity they ...

1 | 2 Next Page

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 10 of 14 Comments

Barney2
8 months ago
How can Barney Frank ever have been elected in the first place? He is not Congress material. That is not the kind of representative I would ever want. What is wrong with voters in Massachusetts? I don't think I ever plan to even visit there. How far from the common good are they in electing such a person repeatedly. Guillty as charged.
vance
9 months ago
Barney Frank is a national disgrace. He doesn't have a single moral fiber in his whole body. What's worse than him is the people who voted for him over the years. It takes an immoral people to vote for an immoral politician.
Judy Claar
9 months ago
Barney Frank. Does anyone take him seriously? Blessings...
Manuel Rivera-Lebron
9 months ago
Wrong choice of photo to head the article.
Kasoy
9 months ago
I'm having nightmares of one day seeing on TV America's presidential couple, President & Mr Harold and Steven Smith, having dinner hosted by her Majesty Queen Elizabeth during an official visit by the US president and HIS husband to the UK. May God continue to protect us, our children, and grandchildren from moral decadence.
Marie
9 months ago
Stuff in this article reminds me that evil wants to look good and wants good to look bad.
May God, I pray, have mercy on us and on our world.
Diane
9 months ago
Barney Frank is such a repulsive person. He has ended up without one saving grace. I guess that is what a lifetime of lies and perversion lead a person to. What a disgusting way to end ones life. Of course he airs his lies and craziness on the Al Sharpton show, they're two amoral peas in a pod. Anyone with right reasoning should know never to listen to them. Seems as though the democrat party has completely fallen off the cliff. I came from a democrat family and was a democrat till about 20 yrs. ago until I began to face the fact that it is the party of hypocrisy, lies and all sorts of perversion. Most of my family are still democrats and don't have a civil word for me. They are easily the most intolerant people I know if you differ with them yet they tolerate every kind of perversion and call it good. They are ending up pretty sadly also as they long ago lost their Catholic faith. I still have mine, thank God and I am certainly not a democrat, thank God for that too. I could never reconcile the true teachings of the Church with the party platform of the democrat party and I have every intention of remaining a good Catholic. My Faith is the most important thing to me.
Rose
9 months ago
What a disgusting picture, we don't look at this website to see pictures like that.
DLL
9 months ago
This is Un-Conventional Marriage. Barney and His partner are representative of a un-conventional marriage. A Conventional marriage is a 1 man to 1 woman marriage. Un-Conventional marriage is for alternate life style individuals. Un-conventional marriage has no specific definition. The Mirriam-Webster on line Dictionary has already redefined marriage as between opposite or same sex couples. This is wrong because the entire matter is still in debate,as same sex marriage is trendy thinking at best,not the actual understanding of marriage,as most people on the planet learned it,when young,as being between a man and a woman. Hitlers Germany changed the meaning of words to indoctrinate the youth to accept that not all people were equal with an equal humanity,that insured equal human rights and the right to life. Jews ,homosexuals,Catholics and certain other to be determined,undesirables were subjects for scientific experimentation then for extermination. Jews were taught to the young to be no better than the worst animal. When the basic meaning of a word is changed,especially a basic meaning,than that is the violation of the basic human rights that govern all people. Lies must never be taught as absolute truth. It is a lie to change the basic meaning of a word to force an agenda like so called"Gay marriage". Any government body loses the respect and the common trust of the governed,when it chooses to change the the meaning of something,so that the lie is the agenda that the governed must accept as the truth.
abey
9 months ago
Either go with God or with Mammon, either say Yea or Nay, beat not about the bush, in terms of Gay behavior weather acting individually falling into unions, even unto its pride . It is sin, trying to define it in legal terms through strange names like 'Rights" to gain acceptance but in the truth, called to come out of that, for unto Sodom & Gomorrah God did to give any chance for it to be least accepted ,even unto having a soft corner through sentimentalism to Lots wife becoming salt, but utterly destroyed it & to think He will accept it now is to a strong delusion, for they believe not the truth, clearly to the Prophecy. Today the supporters of "Gay attitudes" in what ever form, even through their "Sentimentalism " called 'Appeasing the Sin" (for people like Barney to say his gay behavior turned into an attitude, from young but for his heart's hard hardness in the rebellion against the truth of God hiding behind Paganism & Atheism)) can take a cue from that pillar of salt to the greater salt of Sodom. Hell.

Prev12 Next

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment